Justification

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from antiqueman1. Show antiqueman1's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : "WE" gave up something?  What in the heck did you have invested in it JIM?  I am sorry I must have missed where you were signing the $236 Million in paychecks.... I understand loving a home towne team and I do... but damned YOU are being ridiculous....  We got TWO top 100 prospects ( if the article I read was right)... a guy who was a dodger top ten prospect a couple years ago.... and another player.... and we gogt $236million of CAP ROOM!   best of all JIM.... YOU GAVE UP NOTHING!
    Posted by FenwayChuck[/QUOTE]

    Right on Fenway. This trade had nothing to do with man for man. Heck, it was a bonus that the SOX got anyone in this trade deal. Getting rid of those insane contracts(only paying 10-12mil) was plenty for me, but to have actually picked up some players too. Well done SOX MANAGEMENT
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]So if we had kept Beltre would we ever have traded for AGon? Make your mind up about who to say was the wrong player to let go. 
    Posted by EnchiladaT[/QUOTE]

    I wish the Red Sox had kept Beltre and traded Youk.  I posted this on several threads.  Beltre is still a very good defensive 3rd baseman and I always thought he was much better than Youkilis.  He is still a very good offensive player also.  I realize that the Red Sox never had any intentions of trading Youk at that time, although, they eventually did trade him to bring up Middlebrooks.  If Beltre was still with the Red Sox he could still play 3rd and DH on occasion. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : "WE" gave up something?  What in the heck did you have invested in it JIM?  I am sorry I must have missed where you were signing the $236 Million in paychecks.... I understand loving a home towne team and I do... but damned YOU are being ridiculous....  We got TWO top 100 prospects ( if the article I read was right)... a guy who was a dodger top ten prospect a couple years ago.... and another player.... and we gogt $236million of CAP ROOM!   best of all JIM.... YOU GAVE UP NOTHING!
    Posted by FenwayChuck[/QUOTE]

    Hey upchuck saying WE is a sign of being a fan has nothing to do with signing paychecks.  Getting two top 100's means nothing considering only about 10% of those make it to the "SHOW". BTW you say if the article I read is right. Don't you check the facts before you spread them as reality???? Sounds like a media person!!!!
    Again let me explain ... When you look at it on a player to player bases right now we got screwed. NO ONE THEY GOT CAN REPLACE WHAT AGON OR CC BRINGS TO THE TABLE. Damn can't people read and comprehend anymore.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Justification

    Jim and I did give up something, though, chuck. We gave up our hope of seeing a Sox team that can compete and possibly make the postseason for likely the next 4 or 5 seasons. That's what we really gave up.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]Jim and I did give up something, though, chuck. We gave up our hope of seeing a Sox team that can compete and possibly make the postseason for likely the next 4 or 5 seasons. That's what we really gave up.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    They WILL compete next year.

    Things will OK.

    Remember this, this team hadn't made the playoffs in 3 years.  Do you think that was going to change all of a sudden on this course?  Worst-case scenario we are just as bad (we could not be any worse) and best case we win the WS in 2013 (no way we win a WS had we kept things the same - no way)........
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]Jim and I did give up something, though, chuck. We gave up our hope of seeing a Sox team that can compete and possibly make the postseason for likely the next 4 or 5 seasons. That's what we really gave up.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    danny I would say upchuck has no idea what "WE" means when a long time RS fans says it. Being 62 and a fan for 55 years allows me and others to say WE in terms that long time fans understand.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Justification

    I agree, I've been a Sox fan all my 47 plus years. I can say "We" too and not feel like I'm breaking ape law.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : I understand your post...you READ my post and try and understand. It WASNT a man for man trade Jim, so it cant be looked at in that way. We dropped 260mm off the payroll AND got 2 of their TOP pitching prospects to boot along with 2 potential good position players and James Loney for the rest of the year. The Sox wanted to rid themselves of CC and Beckett in the worst way. They got an opportunity to do that in one deal and only eat 10-12mm. That is unheard of!!! They had to give up Gonzo, who appeared to be unhappy here anyway, to get it done. Gonzos production, with the $$ saved, can be duplicated at other positions. And CC and Becketts production can easily be duplicated and even better just by replacing each them. this team is not done yet Jim. Your a good poster here and I can tell your pretty emotional about this which shows your dedication. But I have to disagree with how your looking at the situation. It wasnt a player for player deal. Its more about ridding themselves of some mistakes and not only getting some of LA top prospects back, but only having to write a check for less than 12mm...BOTH teams got what they wanted. Actually, the Sox got more than I expected since I was expecting them to eat between 50-60mm to get rid of Beckett and CC...
    Posted by southpaw777[/QUOTE]

    PLEASE tell whom will replace Adrians output at other positions?

    I understand the deal. I was trying to have people look at it from a different perspective. However I should have known better to try and gets people to think outside the box.

    I stand by my other posts here and on other threads. The RS will not be what they were the last 10 years for at least 2 to 3 yeras. Right noew they do not have the players that are anywhere equal to the one the NYY, Rays and O's have across the board. Yes they have some good players Ciracio, Pedroia, Ells, Ortiz if he stays, Middlebrooks, and a couple of pitchers. However every thing else is up in the air.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ArkaSox. Show ArkaSox's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]Here is the real justification: Even with these departed guys, we were still a subpar under .500 team & not even going to make the wild card. Would Ortiz returning make the difference...don't think so...and he's hurt again. Was the Fairy going to wave her magic wand & change things so we'd suddenly compete in 2013. We had no money to go after anybody to make us better not that what we picked up from LA is the answer either. It just seemed we had no chemistry...no real clutch hitting, pitching and hitting were erratic, pitch well, no runs, hit well, lousy pitching etc. So, a change, drastic yes, but it needed be made & we might even clean house some more. Last night was another example of our team's misfortune...9 runs 20 hits and KC gets 10 runs with 6 fewer hits, 14 ! Sort of story of our season. I say kick the can down the road & build ala Tampa Bay with young, injury free, energetic, enthusiatic non costly prospects. So, instead of watching MLB stars for a few years, like in football, I enjoy watching college teams/ players. Heck, I've enjoyed watching the Little League World Series.
    Posted by SFBostonFan[/QUOTE]

    My sentiments exactly.  But the big question is, will the fan base go along with the time frame it takes to build a team it this manner?

    Can Red Sox Nation suck up two or three years of mediocre Baseball? This is a division where your expected (if you’re the Red Sox) to keep up with the Yankees at any cost.
     

    Theoretically building this team with home grown prospects and value players is a very smart approach, but again…this is Boston and judging from the resent past (post 07) Smart Baseball isn’t the path this organization has taken.

    Ben said in the press conference yesterday that this team has lost it’s way…he’s right.

    It’s time Ben straps on a pair and stops living in the shadow of Theo and starts doing the job he’s paid for. If this contract dump was entirely Ben’s idea (we’ll probably never know for sure) , then it’s a great start. Now come out publicly and tell the fans and the media and the rest of Baseball that this is the start of a rebuilding process for The Red Sox and we have a game plan and we’re not going to stray from that plan….and don’t.

    Ben need’s to take control of this team if anyone is ever going to take him seriously, Ben doesn’t need to be Theo, he need’s to be better then Theo, much better.

    He need’s to stand up to the fan’s and be as blunt as possible and tell us, this is the way this team is going to be for awhile, hopefully better then mediocre, but probably not much.

    I could live with that kind of honesty and I think the majority of Red Sox Nation would probably find honesty from this organization some what refreshing.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : READ what I posted and try to understand. Take away all the other stuff MAN FOR MAN we got screwed....we got nothing in return that is as close to what we gave up.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    No, no, no.  The pre-2012 AGon was hugely valuable...paid a relative pittance for huge production.  Now that he's fully priced at $21m/year (into his late 30s too!) he's not half as valuable...literally.  This is no big deal....we could have given AGon away for free and reinvested his salary in a pretty good 1Bman and a pretty good SP and not been much worse off, if any.

    Fully priced veteran "star" players these days are just not as valuable as they used to be i.e. before the Reserve Clause and inflated salaries.  That's why no team took Manny for free when the Sox put him on irrevocable waivers in 2003.  Why can't people understand that?  It's simple!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: Justification

    Teams today if inclined and run by smart management can reload quicker than ever before.  If the Red Sox have a plan beyond cleaning house we may see a quick return to legitimacy. Keeping Youkilis around would have been nice considering this move and his recent play.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : No, no, no.  The pre-2012 AGon was hugely valuable...paid a relative pittance for huge production.  Now that he's fully priced at $21m/year (into his late 30s too!) he's not half as valuable...literally.  This is no big deal....we could have given AGon away for free and reinvested his salary in a pretty good 1Bman and a pretty good SP and not been much worse off, if any. Fully priced veteran "star" players these days are just not as valuable as they used to be i.e. before the Reserve Clause and inflated salaries.  That's why no team took Manny for free when the Sox put him on irrevocable waivers in 2003.  Why can't people understand that?  It's simple!
    Posted by SonicsMonksLyresVicars[/QUOTE]

    That's BS.  Show me the 'pretty good 1B and SP' available today you're going to invest in - there's nothing worthwhile that's available.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Justification

    I need help understanding this.


    The luxury tax threshold is $178M, so we're $5M under.

    Lackey is going to be re-adjusted due to his league minimum surgery clause - that saves $4M.

    Youk is gone - $12.5M

    Dice-K is gone - $10M

    Jenks is gone - $6M

    Papi may be gone - $15M

    So now we're $50M under the luxury tax threshold going into 2013.  $50M!  That's more than many teams spend on their entire roster.  We could sign Greinke and Hamilton if we wanted to (I don't want either, for the record).  

    Why does everybody feel that we were being strangled by bad contracts, when we had $50M to spend in 2013?

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re: Justification

    Although I wish Agon especially, CC too and Punto who did give us some good “D” good luck and Beckett for 2007 if the Dodgers catch the SF Giants(I am a Giant fan too…Sox 1st) and they all contribute to LA’s success, it’s a double edged sword as the posts will as they did be full of what a mistake it was when Youk with Chicago raised his average some 20pts.  There will be a lot of Monday “mourning” morning quarterbacks lamenting the trade. Will be interesting !!!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]I need help understanding this. Here's our 2012 payroll:  http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/baseball/mlb/RedSox/salaries/2012 The luxury tax threshold is $178M, so we're $5M under. Lackey is going to be re-adjusted due to his league minimum surgery clause - that saves $4M. Youk is gone - $12.5M Dice-K is gone - $10M Jenks is gone - $6M Papi may be gone - $15M So now we're $50M under the luxury tax threshold going into 2013.  $50M!  That's more than many teams spend on their entire roster.  We could sign Greinke and Hamilton if we wanted to (I don't want either, for the record).   Why does everybody feel that we were being strangled by bad contracts, when we had $50M to spend in 2013?
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    It's not just about 2013 and you are not factoring in significant arbitration raises to several players or player's contracts that will escalate next year. I understand you were a Gonzalez fan, but he didn't want to be here, and it was an opportunity to remove two guys who had bad contracts and weren't comfortable here, either.  On top of that, they added two young arms to a farm system that was a little low on pitching.  Everyone in baseball thinks the Sox made out like bandits with this trade, yet your love for Gonzalez is clouding your judgement.  With the addition of the 2nd wild card, almost every team is a few moves away from contending for a playoff spot. 

    This was an opportunity to change the culture of a team that was becoming increasingly less likable with the fan base and it was a move that HAD to be made.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : It's not just about 2013 and you are not factoring in significant arbitration raises to several players or player's contracts that will escalate next year. I understand you were a Gonzalez fan, but he didn't want to be here, and it was an opportunity to remove two guys who had bad contracts and weren't comfortable here, either.  On top of that, they added two young arms to a farm system that was a little low on pitching.  Everyone in baseball thinks the Sox made out like bandits with this trade, yet your love for Gonzalez is clouding your judgement.  With the addition of the 2nd wild card, almost every team is a few moves away from contending for a playoff spot.  This was an opportunity to change the culture of a team that was becoming increasingly less likable with the fan base and it was a move that HAD to be made.
    Posted by jasko2248[/QUOTE]

    Who is getting an arb raise?  Not Ellsbury.  Maybe Salty.  Contractual raises are already factored into the payroll totals. 

    If Lester doesn't bounce back, there is a $250K buyout on his contract after 2013.  Beckett's deal was up after 2014.  Lackey is working for league minimum after 2014, and if he bounces back at all has good trade value after next year.

    My question is what do you want to do with all this money we have saved, and could you do it with $50M?  If so, we could have DFA'd Crawford and Beckett, and still had enough flexibility to do whatever we wanted.

    I can understand why baseball executives and owners are applauding this move for the Red Sox.  I don't understand why fans are.


     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : Who is getting an arb raise?  Not Ellsbury.  Maybe Salty.  Contractual raises are already factored into the payroll totals.  If Lester doesn't bounce back, there is a $250K buyout on his contract after 2013.  Beckett's deal was up after 2014.  Lackey is working for league minimum after 2014, and if he bounces back at all has good trade value after next year. My question is what do you want to do with all this money we have saved, and could you do it with $50M?  If so, we could have DFA'd Crawford and Beckett, and still had enough flexibility to do whatever we wanted. I can understand why baseball executives and owners are applauding this move for the Red Sox.  I don't understand why fans are.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    You're numbers are off, but it doesn't matter, you are taking a stance and sticking to it. Nothing wrong with that.  You also don't know if Agon ASKED to be traded, as it has been rumored.  He clearly didn't want to be here, though. 

    If De La Rosa turns about to be a top of the rotation starter (it's certainly possible), do you still not do this deal? 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : It's not just about 2013 and you are not factoring in significant arbitration raises to several players or player's contracts that will escalate next year. I understand you were a Gonzalez fan, but he didn't want to be here, and it was an opportunity to remove two guys who had bad contracts and weren't comfortable here, either.  On top of that, they added two young arms to a farm system that was a little low on pitching.  Everyone in baseball thinks the Sox made out like bandits with this trade, yet your love for Gonzalez is clouding your judgement.  With the addition of the 2nd wild card, almost every team is a few moves away from contending for a playoff spot.  This was an opportunity to change the culture of a team that was becoming increasingly less likable with the fan base and it was a move that HAD to be made.
    Posted by jasko2248[/QUOTE]

    If Gonzalez passionately hated Boston, and there was no way of salvaging the relationship, he could have been traded without escaping the other contracts.  Imagine what the Dodgers would have given up without taking on these other contracts - Eovaldi, Zach Lee, Dee Gordon, De La Rosa, Sands & Webster?  Then we're $70M under the tax threshold and stacked with prospects.

    I just don't understand why fans are cheering the dollars in John Henry's pockets.


     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : If Gonzalez passionately hated Boston, and there was no way of salvaging the relationship, he could have been traded without escaping the other contracts.  Imagine what the Dodgers would have given up without taking on these other contracts - Eovaldi, Zach Lee, Dee Gordon, De La Rosa, Sands & Webster?  Then we're $70M under the tax threshold and stacked with prospects. I just don't understand why fans are cheering the dollars in John Henry's pockets.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    This ownership group has spent money since the day they bought this team.  You really don't think they are going to re-invest the money into this team?  That's ridiculous.  The idea wasn't to "trade Agon," it was to get rid of Beckett and shed the Crawford deal.  Giving up Agon, who didn't want to be here, was the only way to do it.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : That's BS.  Show me the 'pretty good 1B and SP' available today you're going to invest in - there's nothing worthwhile that's available.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    It's not BS, it's obviously true.  Every year there are a few decent 1B options around that while they wouldn't reach AGon's level they'd do a decent job for a fraction of the cost, leaving millions for pitching or other.  Freeman, LaRoche...just look at the list of current 1B men hugely exceeding, say, Prince Fielder's 2012 batting to see how some teams spend $20m+ when they could spend a fraction for a reasonable facsimile.

    BTW, how do you know what will be available this winter?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : This ownership group has spent money since the day they bought this team.  You really don't think they are going to re-invest the money into this team?  That's ridiculous.  The idea wasn't to "trade Agon," it was to get rid of Beckett and shed the Crawford deal.  Giving up Agon, who didn't want to be here, was the only way to do it.
    Posted by jasko2248[/QUOTE]

    I don't think there's a path to re-investment for several years.  I don't think Hamilton or Greinke would be successful in Boston.  I think Marcum, McCarthy & Peavy are too risky for an injury-plagued team.  I think the 1B pool is anemic, I think the 2014 FA market is even worse, and I'm starting to think that we should let Papi go, as his bat is lethal but his legs are too mangled to even step in the box four times a day.

    With regards to trades, I think their are very few difference-makers on non-contending teams, particularly given the second wild-card slot, and I think any significant trade we make would cost far more in prospects than we landed in this deal.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : READ what I posted and try to understand. Take away all the other stuff MAN FOR MAN we got screwed....we got nothing in return that is as close to what we gave up.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    Straight up you are right. But why do you ignore the salary relief/bad contracts removal the Sox received
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Justification : I don't think there's a path to re-investment for several years.  I don't think Hamilton or Greinke would be successful in Boston.  I think Marcum, McCarthy & Peavy are too risky for an injury-plagued team.  I think the 1B pool is anemic, I think the 2014 FA market is even worse, and I'm starting to think that we should let Papi go, as his bat is lethal but his legs are too mangled to even step in the box four times a day. With regards to trades, I think their are very few difference-makers on non-contending teams, particularly given the second wild-card slot, and I think any significant trade we make would cost far more in prospects than we landed in this deal.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    First of all, you have no idea who will be "available" this winter.  Did you think that Adrian Gonzalez would be "available" this season?  You don't need a "superstar" 1st baseman to be competitive. We won with Kevin Millar at first. 

    Again, if De La Rosa becomes a top of the rotation starter, do you still not make this deal?  We all have our favorite players, but at the end of the day, it's the name on the front that matters...
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ArkaSox. Show ArkaSox's posts

    Re: Justification

    In Response to Re: Justification:
    [QUOTE]Teams today if inclined and run by smart management can reload quicker than ever before.  If the Red Sox have a plan beyond cleaning house we may see a quick return to legitimacy. Keeping Youkilis around would have been nice considering this move and his recent play.
    Posted by concord27[/QUOTE]

    What if the plan runs into some snafu’s along the way and the “turn around time” takes longer then expected? Are Red Sox fans capable of waiting?

    What would a reasonable “turn around time” be for this team in the fans (normal or rabid) estimation?
     

    What would the fans (normal or rabid) consider an acceptable W-L record for 2013 considering it’s a rebuilding year?

    It’s fan reaction that’s going to determine what direction this origination take’s in the off season.


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share